I really think having Rachael sign the document stating that she knew was a way to keep her mouth shut. A mutually assured destruction type of insurance. She can't turn them in without being implicated herself.

As far as Louis alone in the room with all the files of students, I would really imagine that there would be more than what was in those cabinets.

I really think having Rachael sign the document stating that she knew was a way to keep her mouth shut. A mutually assured destruction type of insurance. She can't turn them in without being implicated herself.

No. Well, yes, that may true, but it is not the main reason for the document. The problem is if someone else starts trouble, specifically, her father. She could tell her father, and he could take action, without ever mentioning Rachel. The signed document would discourage her father, since the firm would tell him how they would go after Rachel if Zane came after the firm. I already posted about this.

No. Well, yes, that may true, but it is not the main reason for the document. The problem is if someone else starts trouble, specifically, her father. She could tell her father, and he could take action, without ever mentioning Rachel. The signed document would discourage her father, since the firm would tell him how they would go after Rachel if Zane came after the firm. I already posted about this.

This entire scenario helps me to better understand why Harvey was so mad that he told Rachel. Telling a wife is risky but a girlfriend? And the daughter of Zane? I'll never forget that scene with Specter and Zane on the golf course when Zane offered him a $20 (or some such crazy amount) to settle. Zane is ruthless.

Did you notice that Donna became something of a hypocrite this episode?

Remember when Jessica threatened Mike with a letter and Mike decided to go behind Harvey's back and do what Jessica wanted? Donna was very upset about how Mike had betrayed Harvey by doing what Jessica wanted, and Donna, quite self-righteously, told Mike off about it.

In this episode, Jessica told Donna not to tell Mike or Rachel that Jessica knew about them, and Donna agreed not to tell them. Even so, I completely expected Donna to tell Mike when she went to his cubicle that night. That would be the loyal (to Harvey and Mike) thing to do, and Donna is all about loyalty to her immediate coworkers, right? But no. Donna did not mention it to Mike at all, and Mike was completely surprised when Jessica showed up at his apartment and threatened him about Rachel.

It seems Donna talks a good game, but when the rubber meets the road, she is not as loyal as she pretends to be.

Donna is loyal to Harvey, not Mike. And frankly, I was a little surprised that Jessica didn't already know. Mike and Rachel are not careful to conceal their feelings for each other around the office, so it never occurred to me they were trying to keep it secret from Jessica. And it makes Jessica look pretty bad that she's the managing partner of the firm yet it took her this long to figure this out?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azlen

As soon as the Harvard lady said the records of every Harvard law graduate were in the room it was pretty obvious that they were going to bring back the Mike is a fraud plot line. I'm hoping for a final resolution on that but not really expecting it.

That's the basic plot of the show. It's part of the original 30-second pitch. Nothing has been done to fix that problem, so I don't see how it could have a final resolution. Unless Mike either goes to law school and passes the bar, or gets caught, it's always going to be the underlying issue this series has to deal with. I would be irresponsible of them to just sweep it under the rug.

That is splitting hairs. Mike is part of Harvey's inner circle and therefore, anyone loyal to Harvey must be an ally to Mike. Especially in this situation, where it is Jessica vs. Mike, there is no doubt that Harvey would support Mike over Jessica. This would all be completely obvious to Donna.

Even if you deny those obvious points, there is still the fact that Donna did not tell Harvey (who would have instantly told Mike).

Donna clearly became a hypocrite with that betrayal of trust. You might claim that she panicked and can therefore be excused. But you could also make the same claim about what Mike did when Jessica attacked, and Donna really let Mike have it for that betrayal.

There is no getting around it. Donna is now a hypocrite. The show really assassinated her character with this episode.

The new season is here. I don't know if anybody wants to start a new thread. Feel free to do so if you like.

I'm not sure I'm going to last the whole season. I was tired of Mike's relationship drama with Rachel last season. That's still here and now we're going to have Harvey and Scottie as a couple and their inevitable back stabbing bs and whatever conflict with Jessica it causes. I still think they waste Louis by making him be a clown and for Pete's sake, please stop the Mike Ross didn't go to Harvard Law witch hunt. It's played out already.

I have to agree regarding the Rachel/Mike drama. It was kinda cool when Pappa Zane was introduced but now I don't care. I also don't care about Harvey and Scottie although they also make a cute couple. They need some really interesting cases and one case that consumes and possibly threatens some of their lives.

I'm wondering what they plan to do to keep fan interest since all of their subplots have been played out.

This used to be one of my favorite shows, but I wonder if it's just played out. I think part of the problem is that the core set of characters hasn't changed from day one, so there's really not much between any of them that hasn't been done already. Making Scottie a regular might change that, but, it's typical TV storytelling to try and "settle down" the self absorbed ladies man, which is what they are trying to do. Louis' witch hunt about Mike and Harvard is still the only really interesting thing left between these characters. I'll keep watching for awhile because of the eye candy and hope that the stories get better.

I agree - Harvey "settling down" would be sad. But you know, I KNEW he was going to somehow pay that 'buy in' money for Scottie. I think she overreacted a bit when learning of it. I am guessing, it will be her that breaks his heart. She doesn't seem to want to acknowledge that what he is doing is TRYING to change and working at it in the ways that he has seen others do.

I loved Rachel's IKEA remark about Mike's furniture. You could see it.

And Donna playing Louis about getting information and such was great too.

I'd love for them to get back to what made this series so good, the law cases and political infighting, but all this personal drama sure drains the life out of the show. It's good to have a bit about the character's personal lives, it makes things interesting, but as a sideline not the main focus.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. -- visionary

I agree - Harvey "settling down" would be sad. But you know, I KNEW he was going to somehow pay that 'buy in' money for Scottie. I think she overreacted a bit when learning of it. I am guessing, it will be her that breaks his heart. She doesn't seem to want to acknowledge that what he is doing is TRYING to change and working at it in the ways that he has seen others do.

I expected Harvey to pay half of her buy in but wasn't surprised that he paid all of it with the way she was whining.

I remember a couple of years ago where it seemed like the firm had a lot of senior partners, enough to fill a conference room. Now it just seems to be Jessica, Harvey, Louis (?) and now Scottie.

I know that we're supposed to suspend belief, but wouldn't the professor have wondered why he didn't recognize Mike, since all members of the firm went to Harvard, and his Ethics class was mandatory?

Only the lawyers are supposed to have gone to Harvard. However, there's nothing saying that Mike could have been a paralegal (and they don't have to have gone to Harvard). He was yelled at for not completing some work, but that doesn't mean that he was a lawyer. The ethics professor could have assumed that it was something else. I can see paralegals attending an ethics seminar, and finding it useful. Considering all of the other attorneys (or a vast majority of them) had taken the man's class, there isn't much that they're going to get out of his lecture (unless he's written a new book he wants them to read).

Considering all of the other attorneys (or a vast majority of them) had taken the man's class, there isn't much that they're going to get out of his lecture (unless he's written a new book he wants them to read).

I doubt his ethics course is all encompassing. There are many things that wouldn't have been covered in his class.

__________________discipuli nostrum bardissimi sunt.
- Assuming based on evidence is not the same as knowing.
- If you want to argue with me at least use some actual facts instead of making it up.

Was anyone else caught off-guard by the return of Suits yesterday? It looks like it's coming back for 6 episodes, then taking a break before Season 5 starts in June? Seems a bit strange to me.

They've been breaking the season into two parts like this since season 2 just like a lot of cable tv shows have been doing for years, so no, it wasn't a surprise and it's not strange, it's business as usual.

__________________discipuli nostrum bardissimi sunt.
- Assuming based on evidence is not the same as knowing.
- If you want to argue with me at least use some actual facts instead of making it up.

As soon as Louis became partner, with his knowledge about Mike, I knew he was just as complicit in the issue as the rest of them. I was surprised that anyone, including Louis, was caught off guard by that.

Watching this episode, with a good bit of Jessica in it, I can't help but think how awesome Gina Torres would be as Wonder Woman. She can play a gorgeous, powerful woman. She'd have been a perfect Amazon superhero.